Ryckman has a reputation for being the toughest professor. I don't really know if it is true. A couple of my roommates had him so I'll try to get one of them to comment. I know that Ryckman is respected for being a good professor, not just a hard one, so it's not all bad if you have him.

The whole socratic method thing can be a bit tough for some people. I didn't particularly enjoy it. Different people have very different opinions of professors - sometimes it's the nice one's that people fear (it's not the way they ask the question - it's the difficulty of the question).

At orientation we'll tell you what you need to know about your professors so you'll be ready. Don't worry.

Ryckmanologist

I had Ryckman last year. Although he has a somewhat abrasive approach, he's not mean or abusive either. He's basically just an old-fashioned law professor--the way they more or less all used to be.

What people dislike is the way he puts people on the spot for an entire class period, asking questions designed to lead you into (hopefully edifying) confusion. But if you do the reading, and don't take yourself too almighty seriously, you'll find that Ryckman is one of the most valuable professors you'll have. By watching the way he prods students (like a gadfly), forcing them into the bramblebush of property law, you can't help but gain an appreciation for his analytic approach.

Then again, he's been teaching the same cases for decades, so he's got one helluvan advantage over the squirming students. Also, some suggest that his more traditional socratic methodology represents a "cycle of abuse," perpetrated on students who then grow up to be professors and judges, only to repeat the cycle on the students and lawyers beneath them, all because they mistaken feel it is "lawyerly" or "professional." I'm not entirely convinced, but you will soon get to decide for yourself.